Book Description

In Tower of Babel, philosopher Robert Pennock compares the views of the new creationists with those of the old and reveals the insubstantiality of their arguments. One of Pennock's major innovations is to turn from biological evolution to the less-charged subject of linguistic evolution, which has strong theoretical parallels with biological evolution both in content and in the sort of evidence scientists use to draw conclusions about origins.

Several chapters deal with the work of Phillip Johnson, a highly influential leader of the new creationists. Pennock explains how science uses naturalism and discusses the relationship between factual and moral issues in the creationism-evolution controversy. The book also includes a discussion of Darwin's own shift from creationist to evolutionist and an extended argument for keeping private religious beliefs separate from public scientific knowledge. ... Read more

Reviews (58)

Enlightenment
Many good books have been written on this subject and 'Tower of Babel' is no exception. Pennock gives us something of a fresh perspective on the threat of creationist ignorance. He uses the Tower of Babel as a metaphor of sorts to describe the confusion and squabbling among anti-evolutionists themselves, detailing the various positions of intelligent-design creationists, young earthers, old earthers, progressive creationists and others. Phillip Johnson and other creationist leaders try hard to hide theological differences in and outside their camp, claiming that such "details" as the age of the earth, Noah's Flood and the like should be set aside until theism triumphs over the evils of materialist science. Intelligent-design creationists try to 'keep the peace' by avoiding any specific empirical claim about what the designer might have done, relying instead on bashing evolution. In this way, the movement shows its inheritance from its creation science ancestor, which specialized in the negative argument of "if evolution is wrong, then creationism is right."

All in all, this book is a must for anyone who seeks more understanding of the creationist agenda and its threat to our society.

An important and timely work
I first heard about "Tower of Babel" because of its discussion of linguistic evolution, and I have to say when I read that fine section I thought it would be the high point of the book. Pennock, however, has much more in mind when he takes on Phillip Johnson and the other Intelligent Design Creationists (IDC). His criticism of Johnson's slippery conception of "naturalism" is devastating, and shows not just how damaging a theistic science would be to all of science, but how it would impoverish theology at the same time. Despite predictable complaints that he is biased against religion, Pennock is clearly sympathetic to religious beliefs.

Pennock shows the deep similarities in argument between IDC and more "traditional" creationists, and makes a good case that their shared fears of evolution are based a shared sense of existential angst. He argues that this is essential for understanding why creationists are so concerned about the teaching of evolution.

This is an important book that shows a thorough understanding of creationist views. People who are tired of the same old arguments will find much valuable insight here.

Same Old, Same Old
Robert T. Pennock has written a book that is full of the same old tired arguments against Creation Science, or to use the new term, Intelligent Design. To claim that the argument against organic evolution (i.e. life from non-life) was closed shortly after Darwin became published is completely false. The most brilliant scientific minds today cannot duplicate this alleged process under strict laboratory conditions - yet it all happened in nature by accident. His attack on non-creationist Michael Behe's assertion of "irreducible complexity" is rubbish, and bad rubbish at that. Behe, a REAL scientist, proved that if just one component of a single cell organism stopped working, then the whole cell could not function. Therefore every single part of that cell had to be functioning in the beginning if it is to function at all. It simply could not have happened step-by-step and Pennock knows it. Pennock further uses the argument that a stone bridge, while built piece by piece, could function quite happily after it is complete. He does not seem to realize that the bridge is the result of intelligent design (i.e. structural engineers).

In short Pennock's arguments against the "New Creationism" is tired and out-of-date. his book is really no better than the clever fairly stories touted under the disguise of science by Richard Dawkins, which are full of "just so" stories and thin on hard science. Little wonder that Pennock, Dawkins, and other prominent evolutionists will not debate scientifically qualified creationists. The very idea of humiliating oneself publicly by attempting to defend organic evolution without a shred of evidence is hard to take.

As Behe himself pointed out, as far as fools like Dawkins and Pennock are concerned, the evidence for organic evolution will never be in as long as it points to Intelligent Design.

Perceptive, penetrating and persuasive
Pennock's denounces the attempts to incorporate religious dogma into public education. It is the finest of several analogous efforts published over two decades. With penetrating insight, he presents the full range of Christian creationist ideologies, many self contradictory. He examines how slandering Darwin's concept of natural selection ["evolution"] goes beyond biology. The real issue, he assures us, is the curtailing of the liberalisation of American society. In well-crafted prose, the author maintains your interest in a subject at once hilarious and terrifying. He declares that the issue is greater than religion versus science. It is one striking at the very root of American ideals.

The book provides a general history of 20th Century "creationism", its programme and its proponents. The later "Intelligent Design" movement, which declares itself a "science" instead of a religious concept, Pennock declares a sham. Its influence is far too great, yet built from shoddy materials. Tracing the ideas and publications of such figures as Henry Morris and his followers, Pennock describes the propaganda techniques of the Institute for Creation Research and the recent wave material camouflaged under "scientific" or "legal" disguises. Pennock pores over their material, pinpointing their fallacies and exposing their tactics. He shows how evidence is ignored or twisted, explaining how ideology governs speeches, publications and strategy. Through it all, he shows how the Christians are as much at war with each other as they are with "materialism", the label they apply to Darwinian scholars.

Pennock adopts the unique method of showing how the evolution of languages repeats the biological pattern. From an original, lost language, modern tongues evolved in different environments. It continues to evolve today. It's a fitting analogy, one which teachers should note and apply in the classroom. It's appropriate that a scholar of Pennock's stature should thus ally science with the humanities. As he points out, much of the assault on biological evolution could easily be applied to farming, home life and law.

The author examines some of the renowned figures of the IDC cabal with a penetrating gaze. Pennock charitably skims over Michael Behe's ignorance of evolutionary process to focus on lawyer Phil Johnson. Johnson's legal training prompts him to address all questions in absolutes and to create straw men as easily demolished targets. Pennock simply dissects Johnson's writings to demonstrate not only false assumptions, but contradictions so severe as to inspire the reader to wonder how he maintains his academic position. According to Pennock, Johnson's works betray a messianic mentality from which he institutes a project to redeem American society. It's to Pennock's credit that the term "demagogue" doesn't appear in the text. One can only admire his forbearance.

Pennock's patience must have been stretched in undertaking the research to produce this book. He has debated Darwin's defamers, suffered through the morass of creationist publications and endured the assault on evidence unashamedly displayed at the creationists' museum. It can hardly be beaten as an exercise in mental self-flagellation. Yet, this book results in a mine of information, reasoned analysis and fine exposition. Every science or humanities teacher in North America would do well to consider keeping a copy close at hand. It's an invaluable resource. [stephen a. haines - Ottawa, Canada]

Quite an achievement
The audience of such a confrontational book will usually fall in three categories: (1) creationists who want to refute the arguments presented, (2) people who don't know much about biology but were told there was a debate between "creationists" and "evolutionists", and (3) biologists who look for simple ways to explain things to a lay public.

I hasten to point out that no, evolution itself is not a controversial scientific subject and hasn't been for a century. However, the public's perception of it clearly still is in certain parts, and that's why such books can be very helpful.

Pennock's book is very well researched, well developed, and most importantly given its target audience, a lot of fun to read! I would recommend it to anyone, put especially to high school biology teachers who want simple material devoid of jargon to explain the principle of evolution to children.

Five stars, and well deserved. ... Read more

Reviews (74)

Great book! Loved it!
This is a great book if you want a book that exposes the lies we have all been fed under the name of scientific discovery. Now I can see why many educated scientists and professionals initiate or support false fear campaigns (e.g. microwave ovens and electrical wiring) and inventions (e.g. perpetual motion machines) and medical balony (e.g. homeopathy; touch therapy) that clearly contradict established scientific laws. As the title says, some scientists take the road from "foolishness to fraud," while their journey costs us taxpayers millions or billions of dollars. Park helped me to see that we all better learn and promote the sciences in schools so that we and our kids can have half a chance of figuring out the difference between real scientific discoveries and popular "voodoo science." Btw, the reviewer who thought this book was actually about voodoo obviously didn't even read this book.

The Opium of the Masses, the Madness of the Few
There is now a bona fide genre of 'Sceptic' writings, which are probably familiar to people interested in Robert L. Park's "Voodoo Science: The Road from Foolishness to Fraud". Along with the likes of Carl Sagan, Richard Dawkins, Michael Shermer and James Randi, Park attacks pseudoscience and stresses the importance of rationality.

"Voodoo Science" proves to be one of the better examples of this genre. Although it doesn't quite match Carl Sagan's brilliant "The Demon Haunted World", Park's book is noteworthy for three main reasons: The creative structure and fine prose, the choice of the targets, and the underlying theme of this book - how Voodoo Science is a journey from sincere errors through self delusion to outright fraud.

Park's writing is elegant and easy to read. I've finished 'Voodoo Science' within two days, a tribute both to the shortness of the book and to Park's ability as a storyteller. Furthermore, Park explains science well; I particularly liked his explanation of the first and second laws of thermodynamics ("You can't win" and "You can't break even, either"). Unlike most of these kinds of book, Park chooses to tell stories throughout the book, and as a consequence gives the feeling of a plot unravelling. Park also manages to tell similar stories together, proving that while fools change, the foolishness remains the same.

Park's choice of targets is also an advantage. Part of it is that Park's book is recent, and that many of the scandals are relatively new (the 80s and 90s, rather then the 60s and 70s as in many other such books). But it is more then that - Park picks on phenomena which reached bodies - US Congress, Prime Time US TV, and NASA - who should have known better.

The best chapters in the book are the fourth and eight. "The Virtual Astronaut" attacks manned flights to space, and argues that they are huge vanity projects of little practical value. It is a forceful suggestion, and one that is actually quite bold - unlike UFOs, Astrology and Creationism, Space travel is dear to the hearts of many sceptics, myself included. Nonetheless, Park's case is convincing. As presently carried out, Manned Space Exploration is a waste of time and money, and as the recent disaster of the Columbia space shuttle has demonstrated, dangerous as well.

I do wish that Park would discuss some ideas which might make manned space travel a more practical possibility, particularly the proposal for a space elevator - a satellite connected with a cable to earth, on which it would be possible to 'climb' to space.

Chapter 8, "Judgement Day" discusses attempts by the US Jurisprudence to fight Junk Science - the use of science to bewilder and bedazzle laypersons, and especially juries. The US Supreme Court ruled that it is the Judge's role to be a gatekeeper, to distinguish for the Jury between real and fake science, using outside experts if necessary. I wish Park had elaborated on this issue more, presenting some of the obstacles to this (such as who is qualified to decide, in concrete cases and on a tight schedule, what is or isn't voodoo science), and the dissenting opinions of the Supreme Court. If Judges have to decide for the jury what science is or isn't, aren't we approaching the point where the judiciary dictates the trial's results? Does the Judge replace the "Jury of one's peers" as the agent who finds the defendant guilty or innocent? And if so, is it a good or bad thing?

The main current of the book, its thesis, is an examination of the subtitle's "Road from Foolishness to Fraud". The how and when of inventors getting lost in their own hype, beginning to lie rather then admit they were wrong. This is an interesting theme which Park could have followed more closely with an inside look at people on that road. Alas, no such a description is given. I would have been particularly interested in an interview with Michael Guillen, the book's anti-hero, a physicist who "documents" all forms of paranormal folly for prime time TV. An anthropologist's inside view on the scandal would have greatly added to Park's book.

Such minor flaws not withstanding, Robert L. Park wrote an interesting and fun to read debunking book. If you like the genre, you'll love it. If you're a believer, try reading it with an open mind - it may do you some good.

Tightly written, engaging, fun ... and informative
Robert Park is a talented and smart writer who has crammed this book full of interesting facts and forceful counter-blasts against the endless "voodoo science" we are subjected to on a daily basis. One big revelation for me -- homeopathy is total hokum. I had no idea the various unique doses contain no ingredients, apart from the lactose pill or water (Park savages homeopathy in a chapter on the placebo effect). I also enjoyed his mention of how a schoolgirl invented a double-blind test that proved "touch therapy" was a load of cobblers (therapists put both hands through individual holes in a screen, while the girl would see if they could tell which hand she was holding hers under ... they got it right only 44% of the time, worse than not trying at all!). Get this book!

fraud,silliness and junk science
This is an excellant book that covers illustrative topics of bad science such as homeopathy,cold fusion and perpetual motion machines. In a readable article like style, Park uses and explain clearly the scientific problems with these issues. He gives excellant descriptions about several pepetual motion machines by discussing thermodynamics and electrical dynamic theory that even a chemist as myself can enjoy. He tends to turn poltical at the end of the book wth a negative description of SDI amd Dr Teller. Science should not dabble in politics so the author's Democratic party bias should be excluded.If your politics lean toward the right this might detract from this book. The book could have covered either fraud,junk science or bad science only. By lumping all these things together it may not be clear where bad science ends and fraud appears. The book appears to have been written as smaller articles for publication and combined.

Skepticism Without Smarm
I would say that VOODOO SCIENCE can rightly be called "Skepticism For Dummies." It debunks New Age thinking and pseudo-science without using the kind of technical jargon that sometimes alienates lay-people.

While its contents will seem obvious to the scientifically informed, it's important to remember that those folks are NOT the intended audience. Mr. Park is clearly trying to do more than just preach to the converted, and I think VOODOO SCIENCE will definitely win some converts. Five stars. ... Read more

Amazon.com

In a crisp, passionate argument sure to draw the wrath of many biologists, Simon Conway Morris defends his belief that evolutionary science is misguided without a somewhat religious notion of the significance of human intelligence and existence. At the same time, he is careful to distance himself from creation "scientists" by reminding readers that:

Evolution is true, it happens, it is the way the world is, and we too are one of its products. This does not mean that evolution does not have metaphysical implications; I remain convinced that this is the case.

He uses convergence as his foundation, defining it as "the recurrent tendency of biological organization to arrive at the same 'solution' to a particular 'need'" and offering a multitude of examples, including eusociality, olfaction, and the generation of electrical fields. In outlining the direction and inevitability he believes is inherent in evolution, Conway Morris stacks up compelling evidence in the form of a revealed "protein hyperspace" that limits the possibilities of amino acid combination to a few, often repeated (pre-ordained?) forms. While he skirts a focus on the relentless environmental pressures that result in adaptation, Conway Morris also derides the notion that the gene rules evolution. He accuses his opponents (primarily Stephen Jay Gould and Richard Dawkins) "genetic fundamentalism" who use "sleights of hand, special pleading, and sanctimoniousness... trying to smuggle back the moral principle through the agency of the gene." Dense with examples and complex biological proofs, Life's Solution is not an easy explanation of convergence for general readers. Still, it is a clear and exciting elucidation of the theory that evolution might have predictable outcomes, even for those who find Conway Morris' metaphysical arguments unconvincing. --Therese Littleton ... Read more

Reviews (12)

Delightful and thought provoking
Life's Solution is one of those books that does not easily submit to a pithy review. The book is many things. It is first of all a striking and elegantly written catalogue of what Conway Morris calls "the ubiquity of convergence" in the biological world.

While many folks are familiar with a handful of examples of convergence (the camera eye and those marsupials in Australia come to mind), it is remarkable how pervasive the phenomenon is. In fact, although I still don't know what to make of it, Conway Morris convinced me that convergence is a fact about the world that deserves more attention than it has received.

But the book is much more than a mere compendium of examples. For Conway Morris uses the ubiquity of convergence as a counterweight to the almost orthodox view that the history of life is a governed by a large helping of luck and accident, and that, to paraphrase S.J. Gould, if we reran the tape of life's history, it would have turned out entirely differently. Convergence suggests that, whatever the role played by happenstance, natural selection has worked under narrow constraints built into the structure of reality.

Conway Morris concludes the book with some perhaps preliminary discussions about the possibility of religious and scientific understandings of the world peacefully co-existing. Here as elswhere, Conway Morris only hints at certain ideas rather than pursuing them exhaustively. As a result, some reviewers have written unfair and uncharitable things about the book. But I, for one, was left with much to ponder, and with the hope that Conway Morris will continue his provocative explorations.

An Excellent Book
Cambridge paleontologist Simon Conway Morris in this book covers convergence and its implications for understanding evolution. Convergence (also called homoplasy) is the independent evolution of similar traits among distantly related organisms such as humans and octopi have similar eye anatomy (although one is inverted, the other verted). Life is replete with examples of convergence on every level: molecular, cellular, even behavioral. Convergence is the key to understanding that evolution, despite its tremendous variety, is fraught with direction, or shall we dare say, purpose. It is a bold statement that will undoubtedly receive a strong reaction from the bulk of the evolutionary community. Morris uses almost half of the book to discuss the building blocks of life (DNA, RNA, proteins, and sugars such as ribose) .He shows that, although these building blocks are very easy to synthesize, this does not help us to understand the origin of life, which, he argues persuasively, is about as unlikely an event as can be conceived. Every approach we have taken to understand how life could have originated now seems at a dead end. Morris spends one chapter looking at the uniqueness of our planet and concludes, as does Peter Ward and Donald Brownlee, that life of any kind is a phenomenally unlikely state of affairs anywhere in the universe. While upholding an adaptationist view, Morris labels adherents of the cold, ruthless, and ultimately purposeless evolutionary reality, such as Huxley, Simpson, Mayr, Ernst Haeckel, Clarence Darrow, and even Richard Dawkins as "ultra-Darwinists". He finds fault with the religious fervor of their pronouncements, and their utter ignorance of theology. Convergence, argues Morris, tells us that a Higher Purpose controls Nature. Morris is also as critical of those who harbor doubts about evolution as he is of those who seek to glorify it, but the criticism of ID and creationism is brief compared to the time spent against "ultra-Darwinists". Morris, no doubt, realizes that he left himself open to the charge of being a creationist, and so makes a few remarks castigating them.

Filled with leads to further thought and research
"Life's Solution: Inevitable Humans in a Lonely Universe," by Simon Conway Morris, received a critical review from a mainstream evolutionary biologist in SCIENCE, 5 December 2003. It was stated that many biologists may be convinced that Conway Morris is giving aid and comfort to the enemy (the creationists). The reviewer saw that Conway Morris opposes creationism, but was still critical.

I can see that the book might be irritating to materialists (scientific or otherwise), but if its sometimes-controversial tone is overlooked, it has much to offer the general reader. When Conway Morris takes a position that is not orthodox, it is usually qualified with a question mark. I think the major positive contribution of the book is its many fascinating examples of convergence.

There is a remarkable relationship between the views of Stephen Jay Gould in "Wonderful Life," published in 1989, and those of Conway Morris in "Life's Solution," published in 2003. Conway Morris opposes Gould's idea of contingency. But the strange thing is that Gould, while claiming support for contingency from the Cambrian fauna, praised the work of Conway Morris on that fauna.

From the time of the Cambrian explosion of animal forms to the present there has been a marked reduction in the number of general forms. Gould would take this as evidence of the fragility of forms in the face of chance contingencies. But Conway Morris sees it as a consequence of convergence. The two men seemingly differ only in their conclusions from the evidence, but I think there is a deeper divide. To Gould nature is fundamentally probabilistic, but to Conway Morris it is deterministic. I agree, recalling that Einstein championed determinism in physics.

Gould used the idea of replaying the tape of evolution. He argued that contingencies would make the reappearance of man very unlikely. To Gould, a replay is only a thought experiment to help us understand. But Conway Morris asks what can be done in the laboratory? On pages 121-124 he describes experiments done by Lenski and Travisano with the bacterium Escherichia coli over a large number of generations. It was first separated into several populations. Then they were allowed to diversify, and were separated further. Finally all populations were switched from their customary and agreeable glucose diet to a maltose diet and allowed to try to adapt during 1000 generations. The degree and mode of their adaptation was partly due to convergence, in addition to starting points and chance, and the three could be separated statistically. Over the long term, convergence won.

Conway Morris questions the theory of the "RNA world," including the idea that the RNA was self-replicating. I think he overdoes his skepticism there. A Perspective by Leslie Orgel: "A simpler nucleic acid," in SCIENCE, 17 Nov 2000, discusses self-replication of the simpler nucleic acid TNA as well as RNA. It seems to me that the self-replicating property of RNA, TNA and similar nucleic acids assures the appearance of life by one route or another, and so discounts Conway Morris's notion that the conditions for life have to be "just right," as they are on Earth. He argues that those conditions are rare in the universe, and so account for our failure to see evidence of life elsewhere. My own view is different: My guess is that we don't find intelligent life elsewhere because when it reaches our stage of development it self-destructs. Maybe that creates a challenge: Can we be the first to acquire wisdom as well as technical skill?

Is evolutionary convergence merely a convergence of characters of two or more species when they adapt to similar ecological niches? Conway Morris would like to embed the concept in a more structured context. In reference to an interesting application he expresses it in terms of "morphological space." The particular application is to "skeleton space" as defined by Thomas and Reif. He seems to be saying that each of the conceivable morphologies in skeleton space is a fixed-point attractor. The attractor emerges as the laws of nature guide the unfolding dynamics of evolution.

Is this concept of fixed-point attractors in a character space too discrete? In "The Crucible of Creation" Conway Morris gives another example, from the work of D.M. Raup: the morphospace for the geometry of the shells secreted by the molluscs. Some regions of this morphospace are thickly populated. But other zones are more or less empty. In these, the solutions to the equations that govern the geometry can be used to visualize the hypothetical shapes, but they somehow look "wrong." Thus the general morphospace is continuous, but only particular points are realized in the real world determined by evolution.

Conway Morris makes a good case for the inevitability of humans, but the evidence is sometimes fragmentary. I think this is only the beginning. There may be as yet untapped evidence in our own present natures. In particular, I suspect that a physical understanding of the network dynamics of our nervous systems will lead to the conclusion that the brains which appeared in the Cambrian explosion would inevitably evolve to the present level, and perhaps beyond.

In Chapter 10 Conway Morris returns to the ubiquity of convergence. Convergence is found not only in directly observable phenotypic characters, but also at the molecular level. For instance, the protein rhodopsin for color vision is tuned to particular colors by substitutions at key sites, and different species adapting to the same color sometimes use identical substitutions. It can become uncertain whether molecular similarities and identities are due to convergence or common ancestry. Thus there is at the present level of knowledge a measure of uncertainty which could be exploited by creationists. But fortunately overall outlines of order are found in cladistic analysis based on molecular evidence. This reflects general human understanding as it looks out on the world with faith that order will be found.

The inevitability of creation
This book is yeat another example of evolutionists' leaps of faith. Instead of comming to the obvious conclusion that the convergence of biological principles and mechanisms is the result of the inteligent design of a Common Creator, the author concludes by the inevitability of evolution. This is not fact. This is the author's convenient interpretation. Frankly I don't see any evidence that supports that conclusion. All the evidence supports instantaneous creation ex nihilo.The convergence of millions of nucleotides to precisely build and sequence aminoacids, proteins, molecular machines and cells and to assemble all that in highly complex and diverse biological organisms and systems cannot be axplained both by gradualism or by saltationism. It can only reasonably be the result of creation ex nihilo by a Super Intellect, God "the author of Life".

A strong argument for evolutionary convergence
Morris, a well-known evolutionist, challenges those biologists who argue that life and intelligence on Earth are the products of chance events. Citing many examples of biological convergence, he argues that evolutionary outcomes are constrained, not infinite in potential number. Sooner or later, evolution on Earth would have produced intelligent beings; if not in primates, then from some other lineage. While perhaps a bit overstated, this argument is a useful counter to the prevailing theory that evolution is a completely random process. However, Morris does not extend that inevitability to other worlds. He believes that the Earth itself may be unique because of a mixture of advantages such as a large moon.

Morris argues that evolution may have purpose, that life is not just a bleak working out of statistics. In his last chapter, he writes that "there has been a resurgence of interest in the connections that might serve to reunify the scientific world with the religious instinct." This connection of evolution to religion may make some readers uncomfortable. While Morris' writing style is generally lively, his digressions into the details of biology may leave behind non-scientist readers. ... Read more

Reviews (4)

An excellent introduction
This is one of Habermas' simpler books. It marks a major turn in his thought, however. He no longer wishes to exclude questions of the "good life" (teleology) from judgements of justice (deontology). He sees that morality must be grounded in a "species ethic" (ie: a naturalist, religious or metaphysical anthropology). This is significant as his previous work betrayed the sceptical approach to modern liberalism maintained by his predecessors in the Frankfurt School (esp. Adorno & Horkheimer). He know longer holds fast to Dworkin-esque neutrality. Nonetheless he still places the priority on deontology, a fact that makes his claims more tangible than, say, Charles Taylor's. An insightful, well presented and simple read.

Unnecessarily complicated
As the rest of Habermas's books, this one is an extremely difficult read. Unless you have previous knowledge of philosophical concepts, you will most likely not understand what Habermas is saying because he makes constant references to other philosophers, concepts and ideas.Rather than elaborating on them, he assumes that the reader already knows them.As well, I found that he takes rather simple concepts and makes them unnecessarily complex, as if to sound impressive.By the time you dig through all the semantic nonsense, you realize that his ideas are not exceptional and they could have been conveyed in a much simpler, straight-forward manner.This book is a complete waste of time since you will spend hours just trying to understand what he's attempting to say, thinking that you will discover something brilliant, only to be disappointed.My suggestion is to pick up a different book that is simpler to understand and where the author does not try to make his ideas sound impressive by using unnecessarily complicated language.

Sharp thinking.
More great work from someone who realizes that NYC isn't the center of the universe.

Drivel
More drivel from the great man of Europe. ... Read more

Book Description

A brain-teasing, brain-pleasing look at the often-hidden mechanisms of innovation. From Archimedes' discovery of the principle of water displacement while taking a bath to Einstein's Theory of Relativity, from Brunelleschi's development of perspective drawing to the Impressionist revolution, from the taming of fire to the creation of the laser, "breakthrough thinking"--that is, a sudden, seemingly unaccountable moment of inspiration--has shaped and advanced civilization. But Nature invents, too--through evolutionary watersheds like vertebrate mammals and formerly grounded creatures making the leap to flight. How, then, does breakthrough thinking really work? What, if anything, does human invention have in common with biological evolution? In this sly tour de force of deep analysis and practical exercises, David Perkins explores the common logic behind breakthroughs across many fields, historical periods, and evolutionary epochs. Drawing on a rich knowledge of artificial intelligence and cognitive psychology, Perkins offers a uniquely integrative theory of how breakthroughs occur, along with dozens of delightful mind puzzles and illustrations that will have you quizzing whoever happens to be nearest. ... Read more

Reviews (9)

Archimedes' Bathtub
Excellent book by David N. Perkins who explores "breakthrough" thinking. The author reflects a "need to understand" demeanor that is profoundly the essence of real learning. Archimedes'Bathtub expresses the contemporary motivation of the intelligent person's need to understand. Don't put the book away until you really make a "connection" to what the author is saying. He is brilliant. When does one know the moment, they cross the invisible line of "affluence" to "opulence"?

...Rob Harriman, Ed.D.
Solana Beach, California USA

Clear and compelling information on breakthrough thinking
This book itself is a breakthrough. I have yet to read a book on creativity that so effectively combines real-world advice on how to achieve breakthrough thinking in such an engaging and clearly presented way. As a book which is targeted toward the business person, rather than the academic, it does an excellent job of focusing on the key points and practical applications of breakthrough thinking without getting bogged down into too much detail.

The authors start out by drawing you in with simple and compelling points on creativity and problem solving along with simple exercises to illustrate each point. They then build from there to elaborate and drive home both the techniques and the rationale behind those techniques in a way that continues to be engaging.

As with any book of this sort, 50% is stuff you already know (but may not be practicing). However, I'll bet the other 50% will really make you to think about ways to improve your personal and your company's ability to achieve breakthrough thinking.

Disappointing and annoying
If you like puzzles, you'll be intrigued to see all the puzzles in this book. But if you like puzzles you will have met them all before. Only one or two were not familiar oldies. More serious are the outright mistakes. The writer coins a buzz word, "Klondike" for his theories and that word is scattered liberally throughout the book. Every time I read it I was reminded that when he introduces it, on page 46, he informs that the Klondike is in the Yukon Territory (correct) and the Yukon is in Alaska (wrong). On page 175 he tells us that ash is a compound of charcoal and oxygen. A man who claims so many fancy degrees ought not to be making High School mistakes, and his publisher ought to have cared enough about the book to hire a competent copy editor.

What is the logic behind breakthrough discoveries?
From Archimedes' discovery of water displacement to Einstein, this poses connections between human invention and biological evolutionary processes. What is the logic behind breakthrough discoveries across scientific disciplines? Chapters examine how changes in thinking lead to revolutionary findings.

Interesting Thoughts and Puzzles, Could be a bit more Solid
I really enjoyed Mr. Perkins' theme and thoughts in this book. He did a good job of breaking down how he looks at breakthrough thinking, and outlining a good methodology for overcoming seemingly unsolvable problems. These theories are then demonstrated through several fairly quickly worked through puzzles that demonstrate how to make use of these problem solving techniques. The books is written in a fairly standard format, with the introduction outlining the 'big picture' and subsequent chapters breaking out details of Mr. Perkins problem solving approach in more detail.

I did have some concerns about the book, the most notable being its repetitious nature. It almost seems as if the author has written a guide to teaching one's self this methodology rather than a book designed to explore the subject in depth. I believe that the author could wrap up his thesis and explain the methodology in probably 1/2 of the space that he has chosen, however, instead he has stretched out the context to fill some 260 pages.

There were two academic areas that I had hoped to see a bit more of. The first was the author's brief review of the similarity in break through thinking with evolution, specifically with the theory of "punctuated equilibrium" which has long been put forth by the author's fellow Harvard Professor Mr. Stephen Jay Gould. Mr. Perkins throws out the similarity as well as a couple of other thoughts on the matter, but never really crystalizes a thesis. One would have hoped that the two professors proximity would have allowed a more mature discussion. The second, which I had hoped would have been developed, was the oddly parallel development of most of the world's major inventions. The printing press of Gutenberg and the heavier-than-aircraft of the Wright brothers were both developed amidst furious competition, as if the time of development for these inventions had finally been "right". It seems as if somewhere in this history there would be a logical point for Mr. Perkins to have developed.

Again, I liked this book, but would have hoped for some more tangible support of his theories, either through experimental results or more first-hand interpretation of historical events. Where Mr. Perkins touches on the subject he does so with a very light brush stroke, and in doing so decreases the potency of what is otherwise an interesting piece of work. ... Read more

Amazon.com

The title of this scholarly yet remarkably accessible slice of contemporary cultural history has a whiff of paradox about it: what can it mean, exactly, to say that we humans have become something other than human? The answer, Katherine Hayles explains, lies not in ourselves but in our tools. Ever since the invention of electronic computers five decades ago, these powerful new machines have inspired a shift in how we define ourselves both as individuals and as a species.

Hayles tracks this shift across the history of avant-garde computer theory, starting with Norbert Weiner and other early "cyberneticists," who were the first to systematically explore the similarities between living and computing systems. Hayles's study ends with artificial-life specialists, many of whom no longer even bother to distinguish between life forms and computers. Along the way she shows these thinkers struggling to reconcile their traditional, Western notions of human identity with the unsettling, cyborg directions in which their own work seems to be leading humanity.

This is more than just the story of a geek elite, however. Hayles looks at cybernetically inspired science fiction by the likes of Philip K. Dick, William Gibson, and Neal Stephenson to show how the larger culture grapples with the same issues that dog the technologists. She also draws lucidly on her own broad grasp of contemporary philosophy both to contextualize those issues and to contend with them herself. The result is a fascinating introduction--and a valuable addition--to one of the most important currents in recent intellectual history. --Julian Dibbell ... Read more

Reviews (9)

REDEFINING WHAT HUMAN IS -- into the 22nd Century
Yes, this is 22nd Century thinking today. I was fortunate enough to meet the author at a LA FUTURISTS SOCIETY meeting where she was a guest speaker. She looks ordinary-- like a college professor-type, speaks clearly but her writing is the extraordinary talent. She combines humanism and science to see how virtual bodies and informatics are influencing how we live, work and love. One of those books that yearns for you to write in the margins and put your notes in the back. Pages and pages of notes on my copy. No one will share this copy, don't even ask!!!! Not an easy read but well worth the journey. I love to read books in hours or days but this one took weeks (in between other reading) and it was well worth every minute, hour, day spent. Perfect book for this summer when the MACHINES ARE TAKING OVER on our screens at movies and television. The crossover from cybernetics to literature is what is so fascinating. I can't begin to summarize all that I learned and all the questions that it brought up for me to seek out more info. Belongs on every science and literature teacher's shelf. One of the books they should require for every engineer and techie at the beginning of their careers. Make way for the future!!!!!

Too full of jargon for me
This is probably one of the hardest books I have ever read--with no background in either philosophy or cybernetics, much of what Hayles discusses is just plain incomprehensible. I also found it difficult to accept the idea of humans already being "post-human." If you are interested in deep philosophical writings on technology and the human condition, with links to literature, read this. If you don't really care about the post-human, skip it.

this book rules, her writing style is near impenetrable
This book is worth the effort. Or maybe all the effort you'll put into this triggers a cognitive dissonance reaction: I just spent 4 hours reading one chapter, so it must have been good. Right? Right?

This book is good, if only for her obvious reverence for the cyberpunk grandaddy PKD (Phil K Dick if you don't know already). Whether or not you accept her premise that we are already "posthuman" she considers her subject matter in a most interesting and relevent way, bringing in fiction that relates to the subject, as well as the history of computing and cybernetics (with some fun little anecdotes about the one and only Norbert Weiner). If you're a geek or into future-minded philosophy, pick this one up. She makes some convincing arguments, it just takes a good long while to decipher what those arguments actually are.

Resistance is futile - read this book
In this book of panoramic scope Hayles considers no less than the fate of the human race. In a rich and detailed discussion ranging from the science fiction of Greg Bear and Philip K. Dick to the science of Norbert Wiener's cybernetics and Claude Shannon's information theory, Hayles traces the changing conception of human consciousness and claims that a great many of us are already posthuman. A posthuman is someone who has been reconstructed in some sense, either physically or mentally, such that he or she exceeds, or believes they can exceed, the boundaries of a human. About ten percent of Americans can be considered cyborgs in the technical sense by virtue of having some kind of artificial implant - these people would qualify as posthuman since they have compensated for some limitation of their bodies through technological augmentation. However, Hayles claims that to be posthuman no prosthesis is necessary, simply the way in which we think about ourselves as conscious agents needs to change. The advent of Shannon's information theory has led to the modern convention of treating information as if it were entirely non-physical. If this idea is applied to the information in our heads - that is, the collection of memories that make each of us unique - then we quickly arrive at the conclusion that our consciousness can be uploaded into a computer, decanted into a robot-body, or even backed-up onto computer disk, giving us eternal life.

This is the story of how information lost its body and it is an idea which is now well established in Western culture and technology. Yet, Hayles believes it to be misguided. Any informational pattern, be it pebbles on the beach or electrons whizzing across the internet, must have a physical embodiment to exist. The importance of embodiment is also being discovered in fields such as neurology and experimental robotics. A surprisingly large amount of the information processing essential for being a responsive agent in the world goes on in body parts such as nerves, the spine and the proprioception of joints - our powerful human consciousness is a relatively recent add-on.

Hayles argues that future posthumans will not be the ethereal information-beings of much of current science fiction, but they will certainly have a much more intimate relationship with computers than we do today. In terms of information flows, a collection of humans and computers contains no boundaries between one and the next. As computers approach the complexity of our bodies and information becomes more important to our work and leisure, humans and computers will become more compatible with each other and there will be an increasing potential for one to collapse into the other. Whether this is to the detriment or betterment of humanity represents a cross-roads which urgently needs to be addressed. Hayles is well aware that technology issues such as these currently concern relatively few people - the majority of the world's population has yet to make their first phone call. Yet, now is precisely when such issues need to be aired before our posthuman futures are set in stone as either assimilated components in a vast machine or as free agents with powerful human-integrated technology at our disposal.

She's definitely onto something here
When the U.S. president called our war against terrorism a new kind of war--a war of information instead of a traditional war--I was struck by the similarity between what he said and what Hayles wrote a couple years earlier in How We Became Posthuman.

Hayles describes how:
1) information is more important than physical presence
2) consciousness is only part of what makes us human
3) we can think of the body as a prosthesis
4) humans and intelligent machines merge seamlessly

The book is well written, accessible, and has been very useful to me in my PhD literary studies. I highly recommend it! ... Read more

Book Description

From the names of cruise lines and bookstores to an Australian ranch and a nudist camp outside of Atlanta, the word serendipity--that happy blend of wisdom and luck by which something is discovered not quite by accident--is today ubiquitous. This book traces the word's eventful history from its 1754 coinage into the twentieth century--chronicling along the way much of what we now call the natural and social sciences.

The book charts where the term went, with whom it resided, and how it fared. We cross oceans and academic specialties and meet those people, both famous and now obscure, who have used and abused serendipity. We encounter a linguistic sage, walk down the illustrious halls of the Harvard Medical School, attend the (serendipitous) birth of penicillin, and meet someone who "manages serendipity" for the U.S. Navy.

The story of serendipity is fascinating; that of The Travels and Adventures of Serendipity, equally so. Written in the 1950s by already-eminent sociologist Robert Merton and Elinor Barber, the book--though occasionally and most tantalizingly cited--was intentionally never published. This is all the more curious because it so remarkably anticipated subsequent battles over research and funding--many of which centered on the role of serendipity in science. Finally, shortly after his ninety-first birthday, following Barber's death and preceding his own by but a little, Merton agreed to expand and publish this major work.

Beautifully written, the book is permeated by the prodigious intellectual curiosity and generosity that characterized Merton's influential On the Shoulders of Giants. Absolutely entertaining as the history of a word, the book is also tremendously important to all who value the miracle of intellectual discovery. It represents Merton's lifelong protest against that rhetoric of science that defines discovery as anything other than a messy blend of inspiration, perspiration, error, and happy chance--anything other than serendipity. ... Read more

Reviews (1)

Wonderful journey
This delightful book explores the journey of the word SERENDIPITY, from its exotic 18th Century origins to much wider use including a recent movie.

The late author, Robert K. Merton was an influential and ground breaking sociologist who developed such concepts as the "Focus Group" and "Self-Fufilling Prophecy".

This book is a must-have for every home, library and dorm room. ... Read more

Amazon.com

The idea behind this magnificent book is to pair stunning images from outer space alongside meaningful spiritual quotes from here on earth. Ultimately, the two work well together, suggesting the presence of a divine hand, or at least a divine order in the universe. Editor Michael Reagan deserves much praise for his keen visual eye, as well as his selection of quotes from the likes of Albert Einstein, Jane Goodall, Stephen Hawking, Dr. Seuss, Theodore Roethke, Carl Sagan, Mark Twain, and Annie Dillard.

Many of the photos were taken from the Hubble Space Telescope, offering fascinating glimpses into distant black holes and galaxies. Some images are vivid and romantic like a Renaissance painting. Some (such as the Voyager I photo of Jupiter) seem to suggest that Vincent van Gogh had a hand in painting the universe. Each photo has a concrete caption and clearly explains what is happening and where the image comes from.

With a hint of irony, Reagan placed the following quote beside the explosive, womb web photo of "Star Birth Region NGC 604": "Stars are like animals in the wild. We may see the young but never the actual birth, which is a veiled and secret event." - Heinz Pagels, Perfect Symmetry

Reviews (2)

Awe-inspiring!
I am enchanted with this book, one of the most exquisite books I have seen in a long time. The photos are beautiful and thought provoking. The carefully chosen texts reflect not only the scientist's natural bias toward the provable, but also the respectful awe of the scientist who cannot totally explain the observable phenomena. It is a book I want to share with many.

HAND OF GOD
THIS BOOK REALLY TAKES YOU TO THE WORLD OF "BEYOND" AND MAKES YOU FEEL AS IF YOU ARE REALLY HOLDING THE HAND OF GOD. A MUST FOR ALL WHO EVER WONDER IF WE ARE ALONE, IT WILL BE ANSWERED EVEN IN THE INTRODUCTION. ... Read more

Reviews (2)

One of the most disappointing books I have ever read.
This book looked very promising; the format and premise of a history book written from the year 2025. Unfortunately, the book is so superficial in its treatment of the subjects that I found myself falling asleep whenever I attempted to read it. The book reads like a collection of facts or sidebars; there are no stories, fiction or non, to pull you through the chapters. Read Probable Tomorrows instead.

2025--a masterful scenario
"The future is now present," claims Bill Clinton. We need to "honor the past" and "imagine the future." Here is a book that helps millennial planners do the later part well.

Coates is a regular feature at World Future Society conferences. Last year I heard him give an 8-part lecture series last year on scenarios of life and business in 2025, and later bought the cassette series.

Now he and his colleagues have brought out the book on the subject. It taps the worlds of science, technology, and engineering to look at the thirty year period of 1995 to 2025. Written in the form of a history book in 2025, Coates gives fifteen scenarios which reflect what life will be like in the United States as well as other societies (both affluent and less prosperous).

* Smart Living / house and home of the future * Information: The Global Commodity / integration of telecommunications * Harvesting the Fruit of Genetics / biotechnology * Powering Three Worlds /energy technology and efficiency * The World of Things/ materials technology * Working Toward a Sustainable World /environmental strategies and tools * Managing the Planet/ macroengineering the environment * Putting Space to Work /cooperation and commercialization of space * Our Built World/ infrastructure and construction * People and Things on the Move / transportation * The World of Production / custom manufacturing * A Quest for Variety and Sufficiency / food and agriculture * Striving for Good Health / disease prevention and life enhancement * Our Days and Our Lives / quality of life movement * Balancing Work and Leisure / lifestyle and entertainment

One added feature to *2025* is that at the end of each chapter, Coates lists the "Critical Developments, 1990-2025," plus the "Unrealized Hopes and Fears" of each field he covers.

*2025* is the best information rich and researched mid-range scenario for the future I have read. It also is enjoyable reading. I have sharing bits and pieces with my son ! and daughter who will be 41 and 39 in the year 2025. They get a kick out of hearing about computer "knowbots," toys made with "smart materials," or machine "language coaches." But *2025* is far deeper than just a preview of future gadgets.

This book could be a veritable field guide to your next 30 years, especially if you are in business, an entrepreneur, a person responsible for planning, or engaged in scientific and technical issues.

I am using it right now as a help in writing radio commercials which illustrate futures thinking for upcoming millennial celebrations. ... Read more

Book Description

[] How prevalent is homosexuality? [] What causes it? [] Is it a psychopathology? [] Can it be changed?

Questions like these often accompany discussions of homosexual behavior. For answers we naturally look to scientific studies. But what does the scientific research actually show?More important, what place should this research have in shaping the church's response?

Stanton Jones and Mark Yarhouse help us face these issues squarely and honestly. In four central chapters they examine how scientific research has been used within church debates-in particular within Methodist, Presbyterian and Episcopal contexts. They then survey the most recent and best scientific research and sort out what it actually shows. Next they help us to interpret the research's relevance to the moral debate within the church. In a concluding chapter they make a strong case for a traditional Christian sexual ethic.

Church groups considering these complex issues will find helpful discussion questions at the end of each chapter. Essential reading for anyone involved in the church's debate over homosexual behavior.

"How grateful I am to Stanton Jones and Mark Yarhouse for this book. As one engaged now for over twenty-five years in the church's moral debate about homosexuality, it is refreshing to read the results of scientific research that elevates the level of discussion and dispels many rhetorical myths. This is an important read!" John Huffman, St. Andrew's Presbyterian Church, Newport Beach, California

"This is a brilliant book of common sense, reasoned analysis and biblical wisdom.A must-read for every Christian who wants more light than heat on what may be the watershed issue of Christ and culture in this generation." Timothy George, Beeson Divinity School of Samford University

"Both liberal and conservative Christians are ignorant about scientific studies of homosexuality. Furthermore, most do not understand the contributions and limits of scientific claims to theological-ethical reasoning about Christian morality. This new book by Jones and Yarhouse provides significant insights into both issues and will benefit greatly all sides to the contemporary debate." Don Browning, University of Chicago Divinity School

"Carefully written, impeccably researched, biblically attuned, sensitive and thought-provoking, this is a masterful treatment of a vitally important topic. The book is certain to have great relevance for counselors, church leaders, students, researchers and all who have an interest in the complex issues surrounding homosexuality." Gary R. Collins, author and psychologist

"Professors Stanton Jones and Mark Yarhouse have tackled a crucial question in the debate about homosexuality. Both highly qualified scientists and moral theologians, they have made a thorough study of the interaction of scientific research and theological ethics, and in an appropriately dispassionate way. To have serious science and serious moral theology undertaken in one volume is a major resource to all those engaged in the debate. . . . Churches and scientists will be grateful to the authors for this careful book." Timothy Bradshaw, Regent's Park College, Oxford ... Read more

Reviews (4)

Wonderful and Timely
This book is a must read for all psychiatry shcools

A well-written, balanced book
This book deserves to rank higher on Amazon.com's sales list. It seems very difficult to find a book that deals with this subject fairly, since this subject is so politically charged. But this book does a very good job of laying out the most current scientific research. People who should read it may not because they may assume that it's coming from a traditional religious perspective. Ultimately, it is. But the authors lay the scientific research out fairly and draw rational conclusions from it. It's hard to see how anybody could be offended by this book, no matter what side of the fence they happen to be on.Much of the material overlaps with Thomas Schmidt's "Straight and Narrow" (published five years earlier by the same publisher, Intervarsity Press). But Schmidt's book was more overtly critical of homosexuality, whereas this book is somewhat less personal and more clinical. The authors seem to take some pains not to offend. But the book does show (as Schmidt does) that the media coverage of this subject tends to really oversimplify (and, to a degree, whitewash) a very complex subject.

Thorough discussion of homosexuality, flawed theology
Jones and Yarhouse's comprehensive discussion of the science of homosexuality is welcome and long overdue. In particular, the authors touch upon a subject -- ex-gays -- that both liberal and conservative activists have avoided addressing scientifically because the facts reflect poorly on the claims of both sides.

This book makes no claim to be unbiased. The authors do impose a conservative Protestant filter upon their evaluations and commentaries. This results in extensive discussion of "the" (singular) Christian sexual ethic which completely excludes Catholic and liberal or independent Protestant perspectives on sexual ethics. The authors also succumb to caricatures of positions with which they disagree; they periodically stereotype the proponents of alternative ethical frameworks as well as the widely differing perspectives of gay-tolerant Christian and gay-tolerant non-Christian scientists, clergy and civil-rights activists.

Overall the book is a useful addition to the discussion of the science of sexuality within a conservative Protestant framework.

A book of tremendous importance
Too often in today's moral debate over the issue of homosexuality, people from both sides rely on rhetoric and slander in trying to prove their case. Thank God for Mark Yarhouse and Stan Jones and their appropriately titled book, "Homosexuality: The Use of Scientific Research in the Church's Moral Debate". I learned so much from this relatively short (183 pages) book that helped to remove areas of ignorance I possessed on the issue of homosexuality. It contains an utter wealth of information.

If you are a Christian looking for a book with a bunch of Bible verses and simplistic "Jesus can heal the homosexual" anecdotes, then look elsewhere. But don't worry. Jones and Yarhouse do NOT elevate science above Scripture. They believe faith and science overlap and do not contradict one another when each is properly understood. Their main thesis is that homosexuality is immoral and that nothing found in the scientific research disproves this fact. However, they argue, its unrealistic to say that ALL homosexual people are capable of converting to a heterosexual lifestyle. Therefore, there are only two moral lifestyle choices: celibacy for non-married persons (heterosexual and homosexual) or marriage between one man and one woman.

This book is packed with statistics from research done on various aspects of homosexuality including its prevalance (2-3% of overall population), possible causes (genetic, abuse, early childhood, home life, etc.), and rates of success for those people seeking to leave the homosexual lifestyle (approx 30%). If you're not the type who enjoys statistics, the authors do a great job of summarizing the research in an easy to understand manner.

This book is a must-read for anyone wanting to know the FACTS about homosexuality and its relationship to a biblical worldview. As Christians we need to be informed on this important issue, and we have these two men to thank for informing us. ... Read more

Book Description

Explores the question of whether or not concepts and principles involving supernatural intelligent design can occupy any legitimate place within science. ... Read more

Reviews (5)

Well-argued, persuasive defense of 19th century metaphysics
This is one of the better argued forms of the so-called design argument in metaphysics.

"Intelligent design" theorists mostly focus on specific aspects of form in nature to try to illustrate things whose origin cannot be explained by natural mechanisms. Michael Behe looks for irreducible complexity in biochemistry and then satisfied that he has found it and that it cannot possibly be explained as arising from a previous forms over time, he concludes that this is a break in the naturalist paradigm. Dembski does something very similar by trying to show that an information code such as DNA cannot have been derived from a previous form by natural means. I find Phillip Johnson consistently frustrating to read because he seems to me to deliberately miss the points made by his opposition rather than engaging the issues. I suppose this is an unavoidable result of the underlying mentality of insisting on making war on mainstream 20th century science and claiming triumphantly that it is now "in decline." Ratzsch takes a very similar approach to those others, but his points are often easier to appreciate.

From most ID theorists, we're left with a view that obviously helps at least a subset of people reconcile scientific findings a view of nature as divinely inspired or designed by a greater intelligence.

Most ID theorists also generally leave us with a view that most scientists and philosophers of science find unacceptable, because they believe it puts a foot in the door for older and less productive forms of metaphysics to again enter into scientific discussions.

Ratzsch takes a broader, and philosophically more interesting perspective on the pro-design side. Rather than emphasizing the usual (mostly incorrect) points claimed to debunk Darwinism, he in effect argues more to the point that while supernaturalism has indeed been cast out of science; that viewing the universe as having an intelligent design is not neccessarily counter-productive to scientific progress.

Scientists and philosophers of science generally share an assumption from the most common interpretation of the influence of teh likes of Aristotle, Hume, and Darwin, and most interpretations of the history of science and technology. They assume that empirical observation and causal modelling once was polluted by less useful supernatural causal explanations, and effectively stopped scientific exploration in the most interesting and productive areas. They assume that belief in causes outside of the self-contained natural world are either superstition, less scientifically productive, or at least less parsimonious than any form of supernatural belief, purpose in nature, or theory of divine intelligence could possibly be.

Ratzsch clearly and simply disputes these assumptions. He pulls from Newton's theological leanings and those of other scientists to show how supernatural leanings can be a positive influence on scientific thinking. Ratzsch takes the perspective here that if even Einstein believed that God does not play dice with the universe, then we can't deny that having a Designer in mind is part of even the origin of even purely naturalistic theories and causal models.

Some of his points were far more persuasive than others. There are many things in this book I found to disagree with in his interpretations of history and principles of theory construction, too many to list in a brief review, and most probably an inevitable result of my having an unapologetic and unwavering naturalist viewpint toward science, at least in its methodologies. However I did find this to be one of the most thought provoking ID books I've read so far.

I certainly agreed with the author in principle that the notion of seeing the world as designed should be judged based on the productivity of that model. If indeed the universe was designed by some prior scheme rather than being an evolving result of contingency and natural laws, then seeing it as if were designed would yield additional insights. Even if it weren't designed, looking at it that way is a natural kind of human thought process, as the author points out.

The place where I had to differ was that, consistent with methodological naturalism, it seems to me that we already tried the "design" model in the 19th century, and have since then discovered some insights that went way beyond it and have proven far more fruitful.

Ratzsch seems to argue that we didn't give the design model of nature a fair enough shake. If our concept of design is based on human thought processes (design models based on other things, such as literal interpretation of Scripture do not seem particularly predictive to me), and our knowledge of human thought processes is increasing, then it could well be argued that perhaps an increasingly more sophisticated design model of nature could be fruitful in science.

The irony here is that most of our growing understanding of design in nature seems to be coming from science being done within the natural selection paradigm. Building a more fruitful design model of nature from knowledge gleaned from Darwinian science is a wonderful paradox to consider, but quite honestly I don't think most people who want to see nature as "designed" are going to be this flexible in their thinking. So ironically, in the places where I think Ratzsch is right, I think he opposes the agenda of most of the people who will most appreciate this book.

In the end, though Ratzsch certainly made me think here, I had to still feel that as painful is this has been to our sense of meaning, the most important and striking scientific insight we have ever made into our own nature is that we are the result of a remarkable but contingent process rather than the isolated and most revered creation of a loving deity and the center of the universe. Consequently, seeing the universe as designed would only be as useful as a design metaphor would fruitfully produce new insights, and this seems not only as yet a case not proven, but downright unlikely.

Ratszsch does a very good job questioning why this should be so, even though I found it personally unconvincing, and I think naturalist methodology has actually been a positive contribution beyond the original design view that was mainstream when Darwin studied.

Little of substance
As one already familiar with current intelligent design (ID) theorizing I found this book unsatisfactory for several reasons: 1, Ratzsch continually attempts to make the highly problematic analogy between living things and manufactured objects. 2, He continually oscillates between arguing that design could have been inserted in the initial conditions of the big bang or could have been inserted supernaturally throughout history, two very different propositions by any standard. 3, For him the history of science began with the theistic approach of Newton rather than, as should be recognized, with the explicit rejection of supernaturalism by the Greeks. He continually lauds Newton's theism without noting that it was just those theistic parts of Newton's work that were the most unsuccessful. 4, Like so many ID advocates he completely avoids discussing extinction, the necessary other side of any design argument. Overall a very unconvincing read.

Ratzsch Builds Slowly and Solidly
"Nature, Design, and Science" is an excellent treatment of the question of how design considerations could play a role in science. This book is not another of the many "how science is daily proving the existence of God" tomes that regularly appear in the bookstores these days. Ratzsch is both more well informed than most of the authors of such works, and, perhaps paradoxically, less ambitious in his current aims. Ratzsch is not mining the depths of current scientific knowledge for proofs of the existence of a Designer. Rather, he is tackling the tough, often neglected, and always necessary task of asking: Can science -- not just the science of today, but science *in principle* -- make room for a Designer in the first place? After tackling with great rigor a host of objections to including design considerations in science, he concludes that yes, under certain circumstances, the possibility of a Designer can be a legitimate and even fruitful scientific consideration.

Ratzsch's rigor of thought is remarkable throughout the book, as is his grasp of the historical background of his subject. His writing is engaging and lucid, particularly so for a work as philosophically technical as this book would has to be. My only complaint is that he relies on Thomas Kuhn's account of scientific progress a bit too much for my taste. But then again, I never graduated beyond Karl Popper.

"Nature Design, and Science" is not an easy read, and may be boring to readers who have already made up their minds on the questions Ratzsch tries to answer. But for those who appreciate clear thought and who find it important to settle first things first, it lays a great foundation for fruitful discussion on how science and our concepts of a designer can be related to one another.

ID critics should read ID books
It has been the habit of most ID critics to actually not read the book they discuss when they review books by ID theorists. For example, Mark Perakh describes Ratzch critique of The Design Inference by William Dembski as a "devastating critique, revealing inconsistencies and absence of substantiation in many of Dembski's assertions". This is simply wrong and shows that Mark quite possibly did not understand Ratzch's critique (this is further substantiated by the fact that Mark offers no support for his assertion from the book).

The truth is, while he finds Dembski's work valuable, he also points out why he thinks The Design Inference is limited in its application. No more , no less. Overall I think this book is a great contribution to the conversation between ID theorists. And I do recommend reading it.

A fine and meticulous analysis of a controversial problem
Whereas there are some minor points in this book I am inclined to dispute, I am impressed by consistency and logic of Dr. Ratzsch's discourse. I am very skeptical of the intelligent design theory as it is promoted by Dembski, Johnson, Meyer and others. However, although Ratzsch himself is a "design theorist," he stands alone in that crowd by virtue of his objectivity, logic and a surgical penetration into the intricacies of problems he chooses to discuss. His book is not an easy reading, as it is a philosophical treatise not designed for a wide audience. I found that it was worth time and effort necessary to work through it. It sheds light on a scope of problems which so far have been treated without first clarifying the fundamentals. In an appendix to his book Ratzsch subjects the acclaimed book "The Design Inference" by Dembski to a devastating critique, revealing inconsistencies and absence of substantiation in many of Dembski's assertions. Kudos to Ratzsch for having the courage to speak up and convincingly show that the King (Dembski)is Naked. ... Read more

Book Description

Reviews (1)

"Mesmorizingly" Good Book!!
Dark Light is a great intro to a subject that we all take for granted, but whose scientific and cultural origins are a mystery to most of us, including me before I read the book. If you want to discover how the western world looked at the new scientific and commercial force of electricity, this book is perfect! From the early days of SB Morse and the telegraph,(artist turned inventor and promoter), to some weird &qu